SMU in Big 12?

[StangStud05]

first of all, if SMU joined the SEC they would lose a lot of Texas recruits. Just like Arkansas did when they left the Southwest conference. The Big 12 would be a huge boost for school spirit and recruiting. And I promise you, with recruits like Richuel Massey (he's been offered by 14 divison 1 schools), Justin Boren (187 pancakes senior year, most in the state), and Zach Hall (130 tackles in a 10 game season), then SMU could and will be able to play at that level.

[Charleston Pony]

While it's fun to speculate on whether SMU might someday play in a more regional conference, the immediate goal of the Mustangs...and ANY mid-major program in the country for that matter, should be to become the 1st team to crash the BCS party. Tulane, Fresno, Marshall and even TCU have "flirted" with the possibility in recent years. Anytime a mid-major program goes undefeated, they are going to attract a huge amount of media attention and become the sentimental favorite of every college football fan who likes to pull for the "underdog". I hope our coaching staff can find enough quality guys within 300 miles of Dallas who believe they can make that happen for SMU. Put together a Top 25 program and then pull off an undefeated season and earn a BCS bowl bid. That would be a lofty goal to accomplish by 2006. That would really be something special to be a part of.

[NCPony]

ponyte- SMU would have a better shot at winning in the Big XII than the SEC. First of all it wouldn't happen unless they took a 14th team (assuming SMU being lucky #13)to even out the East and West Divisions. SMU would undoubtedly go in the West, which hasn't been as strong in recent years as the East but is in the process of changing that in the next couple of years with LSU and Auburn. Then, you've got UGA, Florida, USC, and the other East teams that always show up to play. So, with the exception of Vandy and maybe Miss. St., that conference is stacked. SMU would have a better chance in the Big XII.

Talking about Texas recruiting, we need to keep Chan Gailey (Ga. Tech) out or he'll try to steal all of our boys. He knows he isn't going to win too many battles in Georgia with Richt at UGA, so he's sticking to where he knows, Texas. Lucky for us, Ga. Tech is 4 states away, doesn't have the beautiful girls that SMU has, is in downtown Atlanta with a nasty campus, and is, arguably, harder to get into than SMU.

[StangStud05]

For your information buddy... the Big XII is the strongest conference in the nation. Not the SEC, although they do come in a close second.

[StangStud05]

The best situation for SMU would be to have the WAC done away with and a new SWC started including all the nearby div. 1 schools on the rise.

1.SMU
2.TCU
3.Houston
4.North Texas
5.Lousiana Tech
6.Baylor
7.Tulsa
8.Rice
9.Tulane
10.Arkansas State
11.Lousina Lafayette
12.New Mexico

Then they could seperate them into East and West Divisions and have a conference championship which would create more publicity for the conference. Also with all the schools so close to each other there would be too many rivalries to count. Which is good for TV and recruiting.

[ponyte]

I do not mention SEC or Big XII from the perception of what is best for SMU, but from the perspective of what a conference would look at as a benefit to that conference.

No conference will offer SMU a thing unless SMU adds something significant to that conference. SMU doesn't bring a great national following to the table. Nor do we bring a great powerhouse athletic program (Weak in sports such as baseball, softball, women's gymnastics which do generate money and TV exposure). I realize we think of revenue sports as football and basketball only, however, some of these programs do generate significant revenue and TV exposure in other parts of the country.

We do have one of the biggest media markets in the country. The Big XII already has access to that media market. The SEC may find that market an attractive addition. The Big XII and the SEC don’t care if we are completive in a particular division but to the revenue potential SMU could bring to the conference. In other words, conferences will not give a hoot about SMU’s success but whether SMU can deliver TV market share for the conference. We need to look at what we bring to a conference not what a conference brings to us.

[PX]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by ponyte:
<B>I do not mention SEC or Big XII from the perception of what is best for SMU, but from the perspective of what a conference would look at as a benefit to that conference.

No conference will offer SMU a thing unless SMU adds something significant to that conference. SMU doesn't bring a great national following to the table. Nor do we bring a great powerhouse athletic program (Weak in sports such as baseball, softball, women's gymnastics which do generate money and TV exposure). I realize we think of revenue sports as football and basketball only, however, some of these programs do generate significant revenue and TV exposure in other parts of the country.

We do have one of the biggest media markets in the country. The Big XII already has access to that media market. The SEC may find that market an attractive addition. The Big XII and the SEC don’t care if we are completive in a particular division but to the revenue potential SMU could bring to the conference. In other words, conferences will not give a hoot about SMU’s success but whether SMU can deliver TV market share for the conference. We need to look at what we bring to a conference not what a conference brings to us.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

SMU doesnt have baseball, softball, or womens gymnastics teams.
I'm not someone who only thinks of football or mens basketball, I support all our teams, but before I believe that there is a college gymnastics program anywhere that is a revenue producer you're going to have to show me the numbers. Same for softball. Baseball isnt even a revenue sport at most schools, nationwide its 4th in attendance and revenue, behind womens basketball.
We have some very good programs at SMU, the problem is that no one here gives a ****. Our soccer, track, swim and tennis programs are amongst the countries best, but our own fans arent interested. The really pitiful thing is that our teams are often bigger draws on the road, I've seen soccer and womens basketball games at Stanford, Tennis matches at Georgia, womens soccer at A&M, and swim meets at Texas that draw big crowds when SMU is the opponent. To the fans at other schools a game with SMU is an important matchup, but our own fans couldnt care less.
There's the real key, unless we can attract our own fan base, no conference will want us. Thats why we've been left behind 3 times now when other schools have bailed on us. We cant expect other schools fans to prop up our numbers and fill our stands. No conference wants to add a school that doesnt pull its own weight.

The Big 12 has no interest in adding SMU. Its not even a consideration. Thats direct from the mouth of the President at Univ. of Kansas. Its not something any of those schools have ever considered.

[McAndless]

SMU wouldn't be considered for the Big 12 if they won the WAC 5 years straight. Conferences don't just trade schools and drop them like they have in the past unless there is a need for it. The Big 12 will not be kicking any members out for any reason whatsoever, so SMU needs to start planning on winning a WAC championship soon or plan on joining the Sun Belt or Southland of 1-AA. The entire talk of that is ludicrous, unfounded rumor.